V. KRISHNAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
UNION OF INDIA
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.)In these proceedings under Article 32 of the Constitution, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:
"I. declaring that the second Sanction Order dated 04.12.1998 (Annexure P-15) and Charge Sheet No. CGP/ 1/99/DT dated 21.9.1999 (Annexure P-17) are vitiated by fraud and hence illegal and void ab initio;
II. consequentially declaring that the Judgment dated 10.2.2006 (Annexure P-23) passed by the Ld. Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases, Chennai in CC - 3/1999, Judgment dated 13.3.2012 in Crl.A. No. 20612006 (Annexure P-25) passed by the Hon'ble Madras High Court, Order dated 16.07.2012 passed by this Hon'ble Court in SLP (Crl.) No. 5179/2012 (Annexure P-26) and Order dated 11.12.2012 passed by this Hon'ble Court in R.P. (Crl.) No. 629/2012 (Annexure P-31) are non-est;
III. declaring that in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case the Judgment of this Hon'ble Court in Rupa Ashok Hurra vs. Ashok Hurra and another reported as (2004) 2 SCC 388 will not render the Petitioner remediless to enforce his fundamental right of life and liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India by way of this writ petition which is based on new material after the dismissal of R.P. (C) No. 62912012 in SLP (Crl.) No. 5179/2012 by order dated 11.12.2012 (Annexure P-31);
IV. grant compensation to the Petitioner in the nature of public law damages in accordance with the Judgment in S. Nambi Narayanan vs. Siby Mathews reported as (2018) 10 SCC 804 to be paid jointly and severally by Respondent No.2 (CBI) and Respondent No.6 (Indian Bank);
V. direct Indian Bank (Respondent No.6) to reinstate the Petitioner with all consequential benefits;
VI. direct criminal and/or departmental proceedings to be initiated against officers of Respondent Nos 3 -4, Respondent No. 5 (IO/CBI), and officers of Respondents Nos. 6 - 7(Sanctioning Authority), and Respondent No. 8 (Vigilance Officer) responsible for falsely implicating the Petitioner knowing that he is factually innocent and playing fraud upon the Court and;
VII. Grant such further or other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case."
(2.)On 10 February 2006, the petitioner was convicted of offences punishable under Sections 409, 420 and 477A of the Indian Penal Code 1860 and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(c) and Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 by the Additional Special Judge for CBI cases, Chennai. The judgment was affirmed in appeal by the High Court on 13 March 2012. This Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution on 16 July 2012. A review petition was dismissed on 11 December 2012. Based on certain additional material, namely, a purported report of an internal enquiry dated 7 February 2017, which was prepared on the basis of a representation submitted by the brother of the petitioner during the pendency of the review petition, the petitioner filed proceedings afresh before the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973. These proceedings were dismissed by the High Court. A Special Leave Petition was filed against the decision of the High Court. Notice was issued but the Special Leave petition was withdrawn on 17 December 2019.
(3.)The petitioner now seeks a declaration that the order of sanction dated 4 December 1998 and charge sheet dated 21 September 1999 are void and that consequently the judgment of conviction, decision of the appellate Court and orders of this Court are non est The petitioner has sought reinstatement in service and the initiation of criminal and/or departmental proceedings against the investigating officer, sanctioning authority and vigilance officer.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.